9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 804X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 MT of inputs received in the factory but not recorded in the form IV register which was got entered. The officers searched the residential premises of Shri J.D. Gupta, MD and from the said residence, Indian currency amounting to Rs. 4.5 lakhs was found and seized. On 27-2-07, statement of Shri J.D. Gupta was taken wherein he submitted that HR coils and skelp purchased from SAIL depots for use by the company. However, a part of the goods had been sold by him in the open market invoicing at prices lower than even the purchase prices and that balance was received in cash. The cash seized at the residence was accumulated cash transactions relating to amount received in excess of amount mentioned in the invoices. Show cause notice dated 4-4-07 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , MD of the respondents company against whom penalty of Rs. 72,000/- was imposed. 5. Learned SDR reiterates the finding of the original authority and submits that the Indian currency admitted to be unaccounted sale proceeds of inputs deserves to be absolutely confiscated. 6. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the respondents company submits that the show cause notice do not allege any clandestine removal of finished goods; that the show cause notice do not allege any short payment of credit on the inputs disposed of and there is no demand of differential credit; that the show cause notice did not propose any penalty on the company. Under these circumstances, confiscation of sale proceeds of inputs is not justified. He also submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany, I find that the respondent company only has filed cross objection even though the cross objection might be signed by the Shri J.D. Gupta in the capacity of MD of the respondent company. The cross objection is thus only by the respondent company. I do not find any appeal or cross objection filed by Shri J.D. Gupta in his own capacity even though the Commissioner (Appeals) has sustained penalty to the extent of Rs. 72,000/- on him. Therefore, the prayer of the learned Advocate for setting aside the penalty is outside the scope of cross objection and therefore, the same is not acceded to. 8. The appeal and cross objections are disposed of as follows :- (a) the confiscation of Indian currency and consequent redemption fine of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
